My mind wandered and explored as I listened to the responders. The opposers of this thought-- what do they say? They said that the right to water is the right to survive and it is inalienable. My thoughts swirled like a great vortex. Why was that statement so interesting? Why did I keep asking myself about this simple rebuttal?
"To survive is a human right." I knew something about it felt wrong. Not that I disagree in the slightest. I know it was intended with the right heart, but was nonetheless wrong. I explored my thoughts. The fundamental quality if life is not to survive, it is to thrive-- it is to grow and to create and experience beauty.
Furthermore, if survival was a human right, then would not access to food be included in this assumption as well? The whole idea of this statement was self-contradictory. That is why my mind kept racing back to this thought!
The fact that one person can lay claim to the world is absurd. This absurdity is one of the primary culprits that lays seed to many of the ills of humanity. What is the solution? I have no idea. Yet I believe this thought is at least a start.